Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA):
“Every judge nominated by this president or any president deserves an
up-or-down vote. It’s the responsibility of the Senate. The Constitution
requires it.”

Tom Coburn (R-OK): “If you look at the
Constitution, it says the president is to nominate these people, and
the Senate is to advise and consent. That means you got to have a vote
if they come out of committee. And that happened for 200 years.”

John Cornyn (R-TX): “We have a Democratic leader
defeated, in part, as I said, because I believe he was identified with
this obstructionist practice, this unconstitutional use of the
filibuster to deny the president his judicial nominations.

Mike Crapo (R-ID): “Until this Congress, not one of
the President’s nominees has been successfully filibustered in the
Senate of the United States because of the understanding of the fact
that the Constitution gives the President the right to a vote.”

Chuck Grassley (R-IA): “It would be a real
constitutional crisis if we up the confirmation of judges from 51 to
60, and that’s essentially what we’d be doing if the Democrats were
going to filibuster.”

Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “The Constitution of the
United States is at stake. Article II, Section 2 clearly provides that
the President, and the President alone, nominates judges. The Senate
is empowered to give advice and consent. But my Democratic colleagues
want to change the rules. They want to reinterpret the Constitution to
require a supermajority for confirmation.”

Jeff Sessions (R- AL): “[The Constitution] says the
Senate shall advise and consent on treaties by a two-thirds vote, and
simply ‘shall advise and consent’ on nominations…. I think there is no
doubt the Founders understood that to mean … confirmation of a judicial
nomination requires only a simple majority vote.”

Richard Shelby (R-AL): “Why not allow the
President to do his job of selecting judicial nominees and let us do
our job in confirming or denying them? Principles of fairness call for
it and the Constitution requires it.”

John Thune (SD): Filibustering judicial
nominees “is contrary to our Constitution …. It was the Founders’
intention that the Senate dispose of them with a simple majority vote.”